The Necessity of Settling some Gospel Government, Part 2
The Second Part.
The Querie.
Whether it be fit according to the Principles of true Religion and State, to ſettle any Church-Government over the Kingdome haſtily or not; and with the Power commonly deſired in the hands of the Miniſters?
I Have hitherto delivered my Senſe of this Querie, and by way of Deliberation, ſhewed what anſwer ſhould be given to it. Now I purpoſe to reflect upon the Anſwer which he doth give to obſerve what Truth is in it; and how farre the Way which he doth ſuggeſt is uſeful for Peace.
To find out the Truth which is in his Diſcourſe, I muſt examine his Reaſonings; and to this effect I will ſet down in his own words ſo near as may be, the Arguments which he doth uſe, (and that in their full ſtrength) to make good his Concluſion: and then I will compare the point of Doubt, with that wherein the force of the Reaſon doth lie.
His Reaſons lie in ſeverall Aphoriſmes or Sections, without Method or Coherence. He is brief and dark, and doth preſuppoſe ſome things which muſt be expreſſed in the examination of the Matter. Now I hate Confuſion, and therefore (without doing him wrong) will reduce his Reaſons to certain heads, under which all ſhall be brought in, which he doth alledge in ſuch order, as his Matter will admit of.
He endeavours then to prove; that it is not fit that any Church-Government ſhould be ſettled haſtily in this Kingdom, from four heads of Arguments.
1. From the Unfitneſſe of the People, and of Parochiall Congregations, to admit of Government, Sect. 1.2, 6.
2. From the Practiſe of Chriſt, and of his Apoſtles, and the fault of Reformers in latter dayes, Sect. 3.4, 5.
3. From the Unfitneſſe of the New Clergy-men, to adminiſter Church Government, Sect. 8.9.
4. From the Intereſts of State, and of the Diſſenting Brethren, Sect. 7.10.11.
Concerning the firſt.
In the firſt Head I find two Pre-ſuppoſalls which he takes as granted.
The firſt is this. That which a People is not fit to receive, by reaſon of their ignorance, or want of ſutableneſſe; is not haſtily to be impoſed upon them.
The Second is. That which a People ought to receive by reaſon of the Unlawfulneſs or Uſeleſſeneſs of the thing, that ought not to be impoſed upon them.
The firſt Aſſertion, is the ground of his firſt and ſixt; and the Second of his ſecond Section.
But the firſt is not to be granted without a limitation; for ignorance and want of ſuteableneſs in a People, (except it be found altogether invincible) doth not excuſe them from Obedience: Nor ſhould good Lawes and Government, wherby a People may be inſtructed, and made ſuteable to perform neceſſary Duties, be left off, becauſe formerly they have not been well taught. Nay in humane Government, the contrary may be aſſerted for a Truth; namely that where a People is ignorant of their Dutie, and doth want ſutableneſs to perform it towards Superiours, there Government ought to be conſtituted without delay; leſt their Unrulineſs and Unteachableneſs become Habituall: for the want of Government doth make a People wild. Thus then the Aſſertion is not Univerſally true.
But perhaps he will ſay, That in matters of Religious ſubjection, it will hold true; becauſe the word of God doth bind no man further to practicall obedience and ſubjection to Government, then he doth underſtand the nature and grounds of that Government to be of God. For it is ſaid, Rom. 14.5. Let every man be fully perſwaded in his own mind, and verſ. 23. Whatſoever is not of faith, is ſinne. From this place he inferres, That if a People be not taught the nature and grounds of that Government, it ſhould not be impoſed upon them: How this Conſequence doth follow, we ſhall ſee anon, when we examine the Reaſoning of his firſt Section: But here I will intimate onelyonly, that the Apoſtles words are not given as a Rule of Subjection, relating to Government; but as a Rule of Freedom, relating to Diſcretion, whereby every one is to look to his own private wayes: For in that 4th. Chapter of the Epiſtle to the Romanes, the Apoſtle doth teach Chriſtians Rules of mutuall Forbearance and Moderation, in judging one another for matters of Indifferencie, ſuch as are meats and dayes: in theſe things he forbid; the ſtrong to deſpiſe the weak, & the weak to judge the ſtrong, ver. 2.3, 4. And he willeth every one to be fully perſwaded in his own mind concerning that which he doth, that he may not do it either with offence to others, or doubtingly within himſelfe: if either of theſe befall him, the Apoſtle declares it to be a ſinne, from verſ. 4. till the end of the Chapter, and chiefly concerning the Man that doubteth in the laſt Verſe of the Chapter, he ſaith; That if he eateth not with Faith, he is damned, becauſe whatſoever is not of Faith, is Sin. Thus we ſee that the Apoſtle ſpeaks clearly of a Rule, by which every one is to govern himſelf in his own private actions: namely that he ought to abſtain from that which he cannot do in Faith, and whereof he is not fully perſwaded in his mind. Now how from a Precept of this kind, a Conſequence will be rightly drawn to conclude: that it is not fit that any Church-Government ſhould be haſtily ſettled in this Kingdom, is not clear to me at the firſt ſight; for, becauſe a Chriſtian may abſtain from doing that whereof he is in doubt, and ought to be fully perſwaded in his own mind, that what he doth is lawfull; that therefore no Church-Government ſhould be ſettled in this Kingdome, ſeemeth to me no good inference. For if the Romanes to whom theſe Rules were given, were under Church-Government (as is apparant they were by Ch. 12.4.5, 6, 7, 8.) and if this doubting in private Caſes of practiſe was incident unto them, and did not exempt them from that Obligation, nor did make Church-Government a thing unfit for their edification in Godlineſſe; I know not why it ſhould exempt this people from the ſame Obligation, or be unfit for their Publique Edification.
But let us come to his proofe of the Concluſion, drawn from theſe Rules.
In the firſt Section, he ſaith thus; That no Church-Government ought to be ſettled upon this People: becauſe, if any be ſettled, it will bring this People either to a neceſſity of ſinne againſt God; or of miſery in the World: His general ground then is this; Whatſoever may occaſion a People either to ſinne againſt God, or to become miſerable in the World, is not fit to be brought upon them.
This he takes as an Univerſall Truth, and doth preſuppoſe it as a thing undeniable: but to ſhew that it is a falſe ground, and not to be admitted without limitation: I may conclude from it in his way of Reaſoning, as wel that the Goſpel is not to be offered to a People, as that no Church-Government is to be ſettled amongſt them. For if the Goſpell be preached, and Chriſt offered to a People in the Covenant of Grace, they are brought thereby under a neceſſity, either of ſinning againſt God if they receive not Chriſt, or of being perſecuted and miſerable in the World if they receive him. For it is ſaid, That all that will live Godly in Chriſt Jeſus, ſhall ſuffer perſecution, 2 Tim. 3.12. and the world is condemned of ſinne, if it believe not in him, Joh. 16.8, 9. So then ſeeing God hath appointed this neceſſity to follow the Goſpell preached, or the preaching of it; it is no Truth to ſay; That whatſoever bringeth a People on a neceſſity, either of ſinne or miſery, is not fit to be brought upon them, for the preaching of the Goſpell doth this; and it is abſurd to ſay, that the preaching of the Goſpell is not fit to be brought upon them.
But he will ſay perhaps, that the Caſe is different; either that there is a greater neceſſity of Preaching, then of exerciſing Church-Government; or that the Cauſe of this neceſſity is not proper, and per ſe, by it ſelfe following the nature of the Goſpell, but onelyonly accidentall in reſpect of the world.
I anſwer, That he will never be able to ſhew a greater neceſſity of the one then of the other; he may perhaps ſhew that the one may go before the other; na…ly that Teaching muſt be firſt; but that upon Teaching, the Obſervation of all Chriſts Commandements (under which the Commandements of Church-Government are comprehended) muſt needs follow, is clear, from the Fundamentall Commiſſion given to the Apoſtles, Mat. 28.20. and he that doth charge Timothy to preach in Seaſon, and out of Seaſon,2 Tim. 4.2. doth alſo charge him in the ſame place to watch; and elſewhere with no leſs earneſtneſs to obſerve all the Rules of Government, without preferring one before another, 1 Tim. 5 21. And we have ſeen heretofore, that the Principles of the Outward Profeſſion of Religion, are no leſſe eſſentially requiſite in Chriſtianity, then the Principles of Faith, although the Principles of Faith are firſt in Order. So then he cannot plead a greater neceſſity of the one, then of the other.
But then when he ſaies, that the Goſpell is not by it ſelf a proper Cauſe of Perſecution and Miſery, but onelyonly accidentally, by reaſon of the evill world which hates the Godly without a cauſe. I ſay, that herein he gives himſelf an Anſwer, concerning the matter of Government: for the ſettling of the Government which Chriſt hath ordained, is no cauſe either of Sin or Miſery by it ſelf; but onelyonly accidentally by reaſon of the ignorance and wickedneſſe of our corrupt nature: from whence you ſee that the generall ground of his Reaſoning in the firſt Section, is not true, as he doth preſuppoſe it; namely that whatſoever doth neceſſitate a People either to ſinne, or to be miſerable, is not to be impoſed upon them: but to make it true a limitation is to be added thus; Whatſoever in its own nature and propertie, and not accidentally, doth neceſſitate a People either to ſin or miſery, that is not to be impoſed upon a People: but then if you expreſs according to this preſuppoſal, the Aſſumption or ſecond Propoſition of his Argument, thus: Now the ſettling of Church-Government doth in its own nature and property, and not accidentally, neceſſitate a People either to ſin, or to be miſeable; this you ſee is evidently falſe, and therefore the Concluſion which he intends to inferre, doth not hold true; namely that no Church-Government ought to be ſettled upon this People.
Thus you ſee that the very ground of his Reaſoning is a hidden fallacie, fit to deceive ignorant people, and plauſible to a naturall mans Capacity, but no wayes agreeable with Gods Truth and counſell in the diſpenſation of the Goſpell. For God hath determined that all men ſhall be brought to this neceſſity in ſome degree more or leſſe, for the tryall of their Faith and perſeverance.
But you perhaps will ſay, that he makes not this the chiefe ground of his Reaſoning; but that he ſeems onelyonly to touch it as an inferrence following upon the precedents, to ſhew the inconveniencie thereof. I Anſwer; If it be no inconveniency in Gods Counſell, then his Counſell to reject all Church-Government upon this ground, is contrary to Gods Counſell; and he ſpeaks in this Matter as a naturall Man to pleaſe Men, rather then God.
Having thus diſcovered the deceit of his main ground of Perſwaſion, you may eaſily perceive that the Superſtructures will fall; but that we may further ſee the force of his Conſequences, and the Coherence of Matters which he layes together, let us proceed to ſet all his Arguments in their Order diſtinctly.
Thus then he doth Reaſon.
That which bringeth upon a People a neceſſity of Sinne or Miſery, is not to be impoſed upon them. The ſettling of any Church-Government will do this, Ergo, no Church-Government is to be impoſed upon them.
The firſt Propoſition of this Argument hath been now examined, and found falſe; his Diſcourſe runnes upon the proof of the Second; namely that the ſettling of any Church-Government, will bring this People to the neceſſity of ſinne. Thus.
That which will put this People upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their minds, will put them upon the neceſſity of ſinne, Rom. 14.5. But the ſettling of any Church-Government, will put them upon the practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their minds: Ergo, It will put them upon the neceſſity of ſin.
Here again the Major or firſt Propoſition, is not to be admitted without a Reſtriction, thus
That which in its own nature, and by it ſelf, will put this People upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their mind, will put them upon the neceſſity of ſinne, if they do it; now with this Reſtriction the ſecond Propoſition is falſe: for it is not true, that the ſettling of any Church-Government whatſoever, will in its own nature, and by it ſelf, put them upon the Practiſe of that wherein they cannot be fully perſwaded in their minds. Therefore this Concluſion is falſe, namely that the Settling of any Church-Government whatſoever, will put them upon the neceſſity of ſin.
Here again you ſee plainly the falacie; but he not obſerving this, hath gone on in his Reaſoning to prove the other Propoſition; namely that the ſettling of any Church-Government whatſoever, will bring the People upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their minds; and to make this good, he Argues thus.
A People that is generally untaught in the nature and grounds of all Church-Government, will be brought upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their minds, if the ſettling of any Church-Government be brought upon them. But this People is generally untaught in the nature and grounds of all Church-Government; Ergo, they will be brought upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded in their minds, if the ſettling of any Church-Government be brought upon them. Although all this were granted, yet the former grounds not being ſound, the Conſequence by which his main Concluſion is to be inferred, will not hold: But let us now examine the Truth of theſe Propoſitions alſo in themſelves.
Firſt then, I do not ſee that the firſt Propoſition of this Syllogiſme is true, and that this is a good Conſequence; namely becauſe a People is unraight, and not able to judge of the nature and grounds of Church-Government, that therefore they will be put upon the Practiſe of that wherein it is impoſſible they can be fully perſwaded, in caſe they be brought under Government. I ſay, that there is no neceſſary Coherence of the firſt part of this Propoſition with the latter. 1. Becauſe the ſettling of the Government may be ſuch as ſhall bring its own light with it, and convince thoſe that receive it of the nature and the grounds thereof. 2. Becauſe the ſettling of it may be ſuch, as will not put them upon any Practiſe whereat they ſhall ſcruple: For both the Government and the way of ſettling it, may be ſo Moderate and Sutable to tender Conſciences; that they ſhall not be conſtrained to any thing whereof they cannot be fully perſwaded. 3. Becauſe it connot be made out, that every one who is to be under Government in the Church, muſt needs underſtand the whole nature and grounds of the Government; or elſe be obliged to refuſe all obedience thereunto, for fear of being put upon the practiſe of ſomething whereof they cannot be fully perſwaded: Is it not enough to be aſſured that the Government ſhall not urge any ſuch Practiſe upon them? And if they know that they ſhall not be led with Rigour, but with Judgement; that the Loſt will be ſought, the Broken bound up, the Sick ſtrengthened,Ezek. 34.16. and that which was driven away, brought back; will not this be ſatisfactory? I do not intend to diſſwade any from endeavouring to ſatisfie themſelves, to the utmoſt of their abilities in any thing whereof they doubt, but rather wiſh that all may be as the B…reans were, Noble in ſearching out all Truths. Nevertheleſſe I do not ſee it either needful or uſeful, that men ſhould walk ſo ſcrupulouſly and partially as this Poſition ſeemeth to allow: For the wiſdome which is from above, is without Partialitie. 4. Nor do I ſee that the place of Scripture, wherein the Apoſtle doth exhort every one to be carefull of his own private wayes, to do all in Faith, and with a full perſwaſion of mind, doth oblige him that hath this care of himſelf, to judge alſo the actions of Church-Governours in the wayes of Government, ſo narrowly that he muſt needs know all what they do, or elſe be ſubject in nothing. It is another thing to be fully perſwaded in mine own mind of that which I muſt do; and another to be fully perſwaded of the nature and grounds of Duties belonging to the Government, which is intruſted unto others: I may do the former, and ſatisfie my ſelf in what concerns my ſelf, and yet may be ſafely ignorant of the latter. So then I do not find this to be a Truth, that the ſettling of a Church-Government upon me who am not fully informed of the nature of it, will put me upon the Practiſe of that whereof I am not fully perſwaded, except I be obliged to adminiſter the Government which I underſtand not, (for then I confeſſe I am put upon the Practiſe of that whereof I am not perſwaded.) But if I be not obliged to do this, and am left free to do what is good for me to do: How is it true, that by the ſettling of Government, I am put upon the Practiſe of that whereof I am not fully perſwaded? If you ſay, although you be not obliged to Practiſe the Government, as one to whom the Duties of Government are intruſted; yet you will be obliged by way of obedience, to Practiſe that which the Government ſhall injoyn you to do, and that may be for ought you know, ſomething whereof you are not fully perſwaded. To this I Anſwer; that it is no Charity in me, to ſuſpect that the Government will put me upon any ſuch Practiſe▪ but if it doth, then it will be time to ſhew my grievance; in the mean time I think it not juſt, becauſe I may think that ſome ſuch thing may fall out; that therefore I ſhould diſſwade all from admitting of any Government whatſoever, till all my Apprehenſions be cleared. Do not I in this caſe not onelyonly want Charity, but alſo take too much upon me, to have all unſettled till I be ſatisfied? why ſhall others that deſire to be under Government, and are ſatisfied in the nature and grounds of it, be deprived of the benefit thereof for my ſake? or why ſhould I put fears and jealouſies in their minds, to alienate them from the love of Government? is not this to ſeek my ſelf more then the Publique?
But his Aſſumption or ſecond Propoſition, ſaith, That this People is generally untaught in the nature and grounds of Government; and therefore it may be ſaid, that he ſeeks not himſelf in this ſo much as the Publique.
To this I Anſwer, That I deſire not to judge him in his particular Aime, God alone doth know the Secrets of Hearts; but two things I muſt add: Firſt, That the Nature and Property of his way of Reaſoning may have ſuch an aime; and therefore that he gives cauſe to ſuſpect that he may perhaps be guilty thereof. Secondly, I ſay, That I ſee no Cauſe to believe that the thing which he ſaith of this People, is true in the ſenſe which his words tend or ſeem to inſinuate. For I am perſwaded that this People doth generally know, that there is a neceſſity of ſome Government, and that the beſt Government is that which is ſettled according to Gods will, and conſequently that it ought to be ſo ſettled; and that it belongeth to the Miniſtery to have the Adminiſtration of it; and that they ought to obey and ſubmit to thoſe that are ſet over them in the Lord: and that as the Miniſter is not to Rule over them according to his own will, but according to Gods will revealed in the Word; ſo that they ought to yeeld to every thing whereof they ſhall be convicted from the Word, that it is to Gods will. I ſay, I ſee no Cauſe to believe but that this People is generally thus much taugh, or at leaſt ſo much advanced towards the apprehenſion of theſe Truths, that if they but hear them delivered; they will ſincerely aſſent thereunto: and this I conceive is enough to make them capable of Government. Therefore although I will not deny, but that many are untaught in the particular way and grounds of that Government which God hath appointed in his Houſe: yet I cannot be ſo uncharitable, to think, that whenſoever it ſhall be made known unto them, they will be incapable to underſtand it. For beſides the grounds which they have already received in the common way of Proteſtancie, which certainly have brought them thus far; we have large promiſes in the Scripture, and particularly in the 35. of Iſai. to aſſure us, that when the Kingdome of Chriſt ſhall be ſettled in the Earth, the Blind, the Deafe, the Dum, the Lame, and ſuch like, ſhall be inabled to ſee, to hear, to ſpeak and to leap; and that the way ſhall be made ſo plain in Holineſſe, that the Wayfaring men though fooles, ſhall not erre therein, verſ. 8. Therefore although it may be true, that the greater part of the People is untaught of the nature of the Government; yet I am perſwaded, that ſo many as have any knowledge of Catecheticall Principles, though but generall, will be capable inſtantly of all that which is needfull to be known to admit of the Government: therefore it is no Conſequence, becauſe the multitude is not yet fully taught and made to underſtand the Reaſons of Government, that therefore no Government ſhould be ſettled upon them: for the very ſettling of that Government which Chriſt hath appointeth, will carry light with it, and make them all to underſtand the nature of the thing, better then all the Diſcourſes which either He or I can make of it. For theſe Cauſes his whole Diſcourſe in this Matter, is wholly impertinent; nor doth it follow at all, that although this People were wholly untaught in the nature of the Government, that therefore it ought n…t to be ſettled upon them.
Thus I have done with his firſt Section; to let you ſee the Unreaſonableneſſe of his Reaſonings therein.
In the following Sections, I ſhall not need to be ſo exact and large, becauſe I will not meet with any thing that doth reflect ſo much upon Conſcience as this doth: or is ſo plauſibe and likely to entangle the thoughts of the Simple.
The ſixt Section is to be conſidered in the next place, becauſe it hath greateſt affinitie with the firſt. For the firſt taketh the Argument from the Peoples ignorance; and Sixt, from their want of ſutableneſſe to yeeld Obedience. But his Words and Senſe are ſo obſcure, as if he were afraid to be Underſtood, and did ſpeak to ſome body in the Clouds of the Aire▪ for he ſaith thus.
It is againſt the nature of Chriſts deſcription of himſelfe, and againſt the ſutableneſſe which he doth preſs for, amongſt all ſuch as ſhould ſubmit to his Commandements. And to make this appear, he doth alledge places, where it is ſaid, that Chriſt doth not cry nor ſ…rive, Mat. 12.19. and that his yoke is eaſie, Mat. 11.29. and that his Commandements are not grievous, 1 Joh. 5.3. and that he putteth no new Wine in old Bottles, Mat. 9.17. then he ends with theſe words, All which cannot be fulfilled in the Parochiall Congregations.
What is his meaning? is it this; that to ſettle a Church-Government in the Churches of Chriſt, is againſt the nature of Chriſts Deſcription of himſelfe; and againſt the ſutableneſſe that de doth preſs for in his Subjects? can any thing be ſaid more falſ then this? For is it not the very end of Church-Government, to make Mens lives conformable unto Chriſt, and to make them ſutable to ſubmit to his Commandements? But if he means not to ſpeak of Church-Government, as a thing inconſiſtent with the life of Chriſt, and the ſubmiſſion to his Commandements, he ſayes nothing to the purpoſe of his Querie. And if the ſettling of Church-Government according to the Scriptures, is one of the moſt effectuall Means to take Men off from ſtriving and crying in the ſtreets, to make them find Chriſts Yoke eaſie, and his Commandements not grievous, and to put them in a new frame of life to become new Bottles, wherein the Wine of ſpirituall wiſdome and comfort may be kept without ſpilling; then the ſettling of Church-Government is no wayes againſt the nature of Chriſt life, and the properties of ſubjection due to him: but the ſettlement of Church-Government according to the Scriptures, is one of the moſt effectuall Means to do all this; therefore the ſettling of Church-Government, is no way againſt the nature of Chriſts life, or Deſcription of himſelf, and againſt the properties of ſubjection due to him, or the ſutableneſſe which he doth ſeek in thoſe that are to ſubmit to his Commandements.
But his meaning is perhaps, that the Conſtitution of Government over Parochiall Congregations is againſt all this: or as he ſayes, that all this cannot be fulfilled in any Parochiall Congregations. If this be his meaning, he might have ſpoken plainer, and ought to have given ſome proof thereof. For he could not be ignorant of this, that many Godly and zealous Miniſters will ſay, that they have experience of the contrary; namely, that in ſome Parochial Congregations all this is done; when with the faithfull Diſpenſation of the Word, the Diſcipline and Charge of Gods Houſe is carefully kept by the Miniſter: and it is apparant, that one of the chief cauſes of Striving and Crying, is the want of true Government, which makes Chriſts Yoke uneaſie to Mens ſouls: and if he appeal to experience, it will not be found that in the Parochiall Congregations hitherto ſettled in the Reformed way, ſo much Diviſion, ſuch crying out and ſtriving, and ſuch Diſturbance of good Order hath been, as in the Churches which are called Separatiſts, or Independents. And the reaſon is clear, why it falls out to be ſo; becauſe their Principles of Government lead them rather to walk by themſelves, and at a diſtance from all others, then to keep the Unity of the Spirit with their Brethren without partiality. The name of a Parochial Congregation, becauſe it is of old in Uſe, perhaps is taken for an old Bottle, by way of alluſion to Chriſts ſpeech; but an old Pariſh in Name, wil be a new Congregation in Subſtance, when it is caſt into another frame of Government then formerly it was in: and it will be found that nothing is done in any Congregationall Church, for Orderly Government of Mens wayes under Chriſt, which in the Reformed Pariſh-Congregation, can not be done with leſſe ſtirre, and as effectually, if the Government were once ſettled.
So then in this Section I find no Argument at all, but a bare Aſſertion, wherein is ſo much obſcurity, that it ſeems to me, he did either not intend to be underſtood, if he ſpeaks to his Queſtion: or if he ſpeaks not to it, but would take the libertie to ſpeak ſomewhat to no purpoſe, or to ſome other purpoſe then his Queſtion, he might have been more intelligible if it had pleaſed him, and not left us to gueſſe at his meaning▪ Men that would convince and perſwade, ſhould not walk in darkneſſe.
The Second Section is alſo reduced to the firſt generall Head, becauſe it is taken from the Unlawfulneſſe or Uſeleſſeneſſe of bringing the deſired Government upon the People.
The Argument runnes thus:
That which is dangerous to bring a People under a Popiſh implicite Obedience, by forcing on them a Practiſe of that which they ſcarce know, or know but in part, and conſeqently is contrary to the Nationall Covenant, ought not to be ſettled upon them; but the ſettling of any Church-Government haſtily, as it is commonly deſired, doth this, and is contrary to the Nationall Covenant: Ergo, it ought not to be ſettled upon them.
The Anſwer is; That the Church-Government deſired, ſuch as we have formerly deſcribed, doth none of all this, and therefore may be ſet up without danger: and the Godly Miniſters of this Kingdom will call this a falſe accuſation againſt them, and injurious to the Government deſired: nor doth he give any proof of what he ſayes, but as if it were enough to have ſaid ſo; he doth alledge onelyonly the Peoples inclination to that which the State ſets up; ſaying, that experience ſheweth, that the Peoples Conſciences doth reſolve it ſelfe in this Querie; Whether the Religion be eſtabliſhed by Law or no? If hi… Argument is this; that becauſe the People doth ſcarce know, or knows but in part that Government which is to be ſettled, that therefore the Government will bring them under a Popiſh implicite Obedience; I deny the Conſequence: for although the People be ignorant, or inclined to do things by an implicite Faith, yet it is no fault in the Government that they are ſo, nor will the ſettling of the Government make them to be ſo; but the contrary will rather follow.Iſai. 2….18. For where Chriſts Kingdom is erected, there the Deafe are made to hear the words of the Booke, and eyes of the Blind are made to ſee out of obſcurity, Verſ. 24.and out of darkneſſe. There they that erred in Spirit ſhall come to underſtanding, and they that murmured ſhall learn Doctrine: For the promiſe is clear; that when the King of Righteouſneſſe ſhall Reigne, Iſai. 32.1.2.and his Government ſhall be as a hiding place from the wind, and a Covert from the ſtorme, and as Rivers of waters in a dry place, and as the ſhadow of a great Rock in a weary Land. Verſ. 4.That then alſo, the heart of the Raſh ſhall underſtand knowledge. From whence it is clear, that Chriſts Government doth take away this implicite ignorant Obedience; and therefore it is a groſſe inconſequence to ſay, becauſe the People know but in part; that therefore the Government will confirm them in ignorance. But he ſayes, the Government will force a Practiſe upon them without knowledge: I ſay, that he doth in this Calumniate his Brethren, and traduces the Government deſired without cauſe, to ſtrengthen the prejudices and unruly affections of ſome that hate all Settlement of Order. Nay, but the People reſolves their Conſcience in this Querie▪ Whether the Religion be ſettled by Law or no? even now the fault was in the Government, that it would force them to practiſe what they knew not; now the fault is in them that will not practiſe till they know that which is warrantable by Law; whence I can gather none other Argument but this: If the People doth too much reſpect the Authority of the State for the ſettling of Church-Government over them; then no Government ſhould be ſettled by the State; but the People doth ſo: Ergo, Who will admit the Conſequence of the firſt Propoſition? and yet except this be preſuppoſed, nothing can be made of his Diſcourſe. But he will perhaps ſay, they do not onelyonly reſpect their Authority, but they are ſuperſtitiouſly devoted to it. I Anſwer, Dum vitant ſtulti vitia in contraria currunt, Fools are alwayes in extreams; becauſe ſome extreamly affect humane Lawes and Authority; will you therefore have no divine Ordinances ſettled? and doth this follow; that the State ought not to ſettle any Government, becauſe the People is too much devoted to their Authority? ought they not rather to be ſo much the more carefull of their duties? ought they not rather to make uſe of their intereſt in the Peoples affections, to ſettle that Government which Chriſt doth require in his houſe? As for the People their error to reſpect man too much in divine Matters, muſt in due time be rectified; and this can be done more advantagiouſly when the Government which Chriſt hath appointed is ſettled, then when nothing is ſettled, but all is in Confuſion.
Thus you ſee, that having found ſo much falacie in all theſe Arguments, and ſo little Coherence in them with the main Querie; I have no Cauſe to give any aſſent unto the Negative which he doth aſſert; namely that it is not fit that any Church-Government ſhould be ſettled haſtily, and with the Power commonly deſired in the hands of the Miniſters.
But before I leave this Head, I muſt obſerve that the whole ſtrain of theſe Arguments doth runne beyond the Querie, and intendeth to make good rather this Aſſertion, that no Government at all ſhould be ſettled, then that which the Querie doth mention. For if the Peoples ignorance of the nature of Government, and their want of ſutableneſſe to be conform to Chriſts Deſcription of himſelfe, be ſufficient cauſes why Government ſhould be ſuſpended; then not onelyonly the Government commonly deſired, but all other Government whatſoever may be ſuſpended upon the ſame grounds; and perhaps the aime is rather to hinder all, then that which is deſired: For the way of Reaſoning doth not ſo much aime at the reſolution of the doubt propoſed, touching the Fitneſſe or Unfitneſſe of the Government commonly deſired, as to take off mens thoughts from the Neceſſity of any Government at all. Nor will it ſerve his turn to ſay, that the General is made good onelyonly, to the end that the Particular may be inferred the more ſtrongly. For I ſay, except it be his opinion that No Government at all ſhould be ſettled in the Church, neither in reſpect of God nor Man▪ neither in Spiritual nor in Naturall Actions, which relate into the inward or outward ſtate of Souls: I ſay, except he be of this meaning, he ought not to have ſhot beyond his mark; and if he be of it, then he ought to have put his Querie in other terms. But if he means not to ſtrike at all Government, then he ſhould have been ſo ingenuous as to remove this ſtumbling block, which every one that reads with attention, his Diſcourſe will inſtantly meet withall.
Thus I have done with the firſt Head; now I come to the Examination of the Second.
Concerning the Second.
In the Second Head, Arguments are taken from the Practiſe of Chriſt, of his Apoſtles, and of the Authors of the laſt Reformation.
The generall Argument is this.
That which Chriſt and his Apoſtles practiſed in their way of ſettling Church-Government, we ought to follow; and that which the firſt Reformers of Religion failed in, we ought to avoid. But Chriſt and his Apoſtles practiſed a ſlow, and not a haſty way of ſettling Church-Government: and the firſt Reformers failed in making too much haſt, therefore we ought to follow a ſlow, and not a haſty way of ſettling Church Government.
The Anſwer to this Argument is, that all may be granted which it concludes in ſome ſenſe, if namely ſlowneſs and haſt be taken in a right ſenſe; that is, if by ſlowneſs, be meant not a lingring, but a conſiderate delay; and by haſt, not an inconſiderate, but a prudent ſpeed; then the Concluſion is true. And I ſuppoſe that hitherto this counſell hath been followed, and wil be followed by thoſe that are in place of Authority. But yet becauſe the premiſes according to his ſenſe are doubtfull, and may be miſunderſtood; yea and cannot be rightly underſtood as they relate his ſcope; to make it good, therefore we muſt take them into Conſideration.
I ſay then, that the firſt Prepoſition is to be granted with this limitation; namely, that we ought to follow the Practiſe of Chriſt, and of his Apoſtles, in that wherein the Caſes are alike, and their Actions not extraordinary, but of an ordinary nature and imitable. Now then if he can make it appear, that in the ſettling of Church-Government, our Caſes and theirs are alike, and that their Actions were hot of an extraordinary nature, but imitable by Us in all things; then he will ſay ſomething to the purpoſe, and may inferre that their ſlowneſſe and ours ought to be of the ſame extent. But then if we reflect upon the ſecond Propoſition, as it relates to his purpoſe in hand, and as he intends to apply it. I ſuppoſe that his ſenſe of ſlowneſſe and haſtineſſe, will not be applyable either to Chriſt and his Apoſtles, or to the firſt Reformers of Religion in our times. For the ſlowneſſe which he ſeeks, is a Dilatory and lingering off putting of matters readie to be done: and the haſtineſſe whereof he accuſes the firſt Reformers of our Religion, is an inconſiderate Precipitation whereof I doubt they were not guilty. I ſuppoſe then he will be found in an error, either in reſpect of the Caſes, or in reſpect of the Application of them to us.
Three Sections belong to this Argument; the Third ſpeaks of Chriſt: the Fourth, of the Apoſtles; and the Fifth; of our laſt Reformers.
In the proceedings of Chriſt and the Apoſtles, he ſuppoſes there was a Dilatory ſlowneſſe in ſe…tling Church-Government, which I ſuppoſe was not at all therein: and he condemns the firſt Reformers for too much haſtineſſe, which I conceive he hath no reaſon to do: Let us then conſider the Particulars.
Concerning Chriſt, he would inſinuate that he did proceed in a Dilatory ſlow way, by this Argument, applyed from his Practiſe to us.
If Chriſt did not ſettle his Government by Miracle haſtily, and over a People not enlightned; then there is no Morall Neceſſity of ſettling it ſo ſoon as may be; according to the deſire of ſome. But Chriſt ſettled not his Government by Miracle, nor over a People not enlightned therein: therefore there is no Morall Neceſſity of ſettling it ſo ſoon as may be, according to the deſire of ſome.
The Anſwer is, that the Major Propoſition, is a Non-ſequitur: For it is no conſequence. If Chriſt ſettled not his Government by Miracle: Ergo, the ſettling thereof by Ordinary Means as ſoon as may be, is not neceſſary: for it was not expedient to be ſettled by Miracle, but by the Ordinary Miniſtry of the Apoſtles; and yet it appeareth to have been done as ſoon as could be without all Dilatory ſlowneſſe. For the Prophets tell us, that the Settlement of the glory of the Church under the Goſpell, which could not be brought to paſſe without the Settlement of Government therein, ſhould be haſtened in its own time, Iſai. 60.22. and that the promiſe of the way wherein the Juſt ſhould live by Faith, ſhould not …arry, Hab. 2.3, 4. Now that which is ſaid to be haſtined, and not delayed, cannot truly be ſaid to be ſlow: for nothing is properly ſlow which comes at his time appointed. And to make this yet more apparant, viz. that Chriſt would ſettle as ſoon as could poſſible be, the Government of his Church: let us conſider that which in Iſai. 42.4. is ſaid of him, viz. That he ſhall not faile, nor be diſcouraged, till he ſet judgement in the earth. This promiſe doth aſſure us of two Things: Firſt, That Chriſt would not differ by faint-heartedneſs, or want of ſtrength, the execution of his Work; and conſequently, that he would not be ſlow in it. Secondly, That the iſſue of his Work ſhould be to ſettle judgement in the Earth, which is the effect of Church-Government: whence we may directly conclude, that the Settlement of Government in the Church, is a matter of Primary and Morall Neceſſity; becauſe without it, Chriſt could not ſettle judgement in the Earth, which was one of the ends of his Miniſtry amongſt Men.
Divers other things might be Anſwered concerning this example of Chriſt, and the way of his Miniſtry amongſt the Jews (as that it was not his proper work in the fleſh, to ſettle another Church-Government amongſt the Jews, then that which his Father had ſettled; but that he was to be to them a Miniſter of the Circumciſion, to confirm the promiſes to the F…thers, Rom. 15.8. And that the Change of Government was the proper work of the Spirit, by which Jews and Gentiles ſhould have one acceſſe to the Father, Ephe. 2.18. And therefore could not be done till after his Reſurrection, when the Spirit was to be ſent forth) but this will ſuffice to ſhew that it was primarily neceſſary in him to eſtabliſh his Church-Government as ſoon as could be in the ordinary way of his Miniſtry; and if Chriſt was not ſlow, but made all the ſpeed he could in his way; then every one that is to have a hand under him in the work, is to do the like; and therefore in this perſwaſion of his, I do not conceive that Mr. Saltmarſh is a Work-man approved unto God, that needeth not to be aſhamed, or that this perſwaſion doth come from him who hath called him to the Miniſtry. And beſides this perſwaſion, whereof I think he ought to be aſhamed, he doth alledge Mr. Colemans Opinion to confirm it in ſuch a way, as is very unbeſeeming to him to do; who being of a different opinion from Mr. Coleman, not onelyonly in that wherein he doth alledge him, to make it probable that Chriſt was ſlow, but alſo in the main and fundamentall Tenet of Eraſtus (whom Mr. Coleman followes) concerning the Power of the Civill Magiſtrate in Church-Matters, which I ſuppoſe Mr Saltmarſh holds to be None at all and Mr. Coleman to be All in all. Who (I ſay) being thus different in opinion from him, yet ſeems to ſnatch greedily at the Shadow of a paſſage in his Sermon, which is to ſtrengthen an imaginary probability, not ſo much of a Dilatory ſlowneſs in Chriſts ſettling of Church-Government, as of the Unſettling of all Spirituall Government, which Mr. Coleman aims at, to make the Civill Magiſtrate an abſolute Church-Officer. And by this alſo it is clear; that his Aime is rather to raiſe then reſolve doubts.
The fourth Section hath this Argument: If the Apoſtles in the New Teſtament, ſettled no Goſpell-Government upon any, but upon ſuch as firſt were brought under Goſpell Obedience by the power of the Word and and Spirit, then no Government ſhould haſtily be ſettled in this Kingdome. But the Antecedent is true: Ergo, the Conſequent alſo.
Now to make good the Conſequence of the Antecedent: he ſayes, if thouſands of Co…gregations in this Kingdome, are not yet brought under Goſpell Obedience by the power of the Word and Spirit; then the Goſpell-Government ought not to be ſettled haſtily in this Kingdome, but thouſands of Congregations are not brought under Goſpell-Obedience: Ergo, &c.
Here obſerve again, that his Argument runnes directly againſt Goſpell-Government it ſelfe, and not againſt the ſuppoſed Government deſired, to be in the hands of the Miniſters.
But the Anſwer to the Argument is this: Although never ſo many Thouſands of Congregations are not yet brought under Goſpell-Obedience; yet it doth not follow, that ſuch as are brought under that Obedience, ſhould not be allowed by the Magiſtrate to have that Government ſettled amongſt them, ſo farre as his Authority can advance it: and if he doth but give way to the Miniſters to ſet up Chriſts Government in his Houſe, and for the outward manner of proceeding therein, doth behave himſelf as a Patron of the Work; then he doth all that is required of him: But it ſeems Mr. Saltmarſh would diſſwade him from doing this: and why? Becauſe ſaith he, the Apoſtles ſettled not Goſpell-Government, till Goſpell-Obedience was wrought: Indeed this Argument may be applyed to Miniſters in their Charges, when they have to deale with a People which doth not yet profeſſe the Chriſtian Religion. But it is not appliable to a Magiſtrate, who is ſet over a People profeſſing Chriſtianity. For the Magiſtrate being required, is bound in Conſcience to give way to the Kingdome of Chriſt, and without delay to further the Government thereof ſo farre as he can, as ſoon as he is convicted of the Righteouſneſſe thereof. Do not you think that Nebuchadnezzar and Darius did well in publiſhing their acknowledgement of the true God, and in commanding all their Subjects to fear and reverence him, Dan. 3.29. & 6.25. although their Subjects were not inſtructed to know him? And did not Artaxerxes well, in Authorizing Ezra to ſettle Government in the Church, Ezra 7. He ſhould then have conſidered, that the duty of the Civill Maigiſtrate in ſettling Church-Government, is quite another thing, then that of the Miniſter, and he contrary to his Miniſteriall Duty, intending to diſſwade the Magiſtrate from his Duty; doth alledge that which is proper onelyonly to the Miniſter, and involves it with that which is proper to the Magiſtrate: thus a Spirit of Confuſion doth as with a Whirle-wind, drive all his thoughts to mixe di…orderly and deceitfully things of a different nature together, to lead himſelfe and others by ſome appearance of light, into the wayes of error.
And as for the Second Propoſition, that there are Thouſands of Congregations, which are not yet brought under Goſpell-Obedience by the Word and Spirit, how farre this is true I know not; but I ſuſpect that he may be miſtaken in ſome ſort herein alſo; not that I intend to leſſen the opinion of great want of knowledge in many Congregations; but I ſuppoſe he means by Goſpell-Obedience, ſomething which truly I do not condemn him for ſeekimg after; but yet cannot think it ſo abſolutely neceſſary, that before all manner of Government be ſettled any way, it muſt be had in ſuch a way as he doth imagine; and till that be ſo had, all that otherwiſe know Chriſt, ſhould be counted as Heathens and Unbelivers. That which I would ſay, is this: It is true that the Doctrine and the Conviction of the Spirit, muſt go before the ſettling of Government in a Miniſteriall way, that every one who is to be governed by the Goſpell, may out of Conſcience free willingly ſubmit himſelfe, as it is promiſed it ſhall be in the day of Chriſts power, Pſal. 110.3. But yet it is as true, that the many thouſands of Congregations in this Kingdome cannot be counted ſo ignorant, and ſo wholly deſtitute of the Spirit, that they ſhould be utterly incapable of all Goſpell-Government. It is well known, that they all know Chriſt by name, and that there is no Saviour beſides him, and that upon this ground they offer themſelves to be his Subjects, and deſire at leaſt in the outward profeſſion, to be under his Ordinances and Government. Now if this much Goſpell-Obedience be not ſome common fruit of the word & of the Spirit, I would fain know of him, whence it doth proceed? Can any man ſay with any meaſure of conviction and knowledge, that Jeſus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghoſt? 1 Cor. 12.3. And how is the Spirit effectuall in us? is it not by the hearing of Faith, Gal. 3.2. and if the word of Faith, and the work of the Spirit, be but in the meaneſt degree effectuall to work this knowledge and Conviction: if it be but as a grain of Muſtard-ſeed, to bring a poor ſoul to offer it ſelfe unto Chriſt, to call him Lord; dare he reject it from the Ordinances of Chriſts Government belonging to his Miniſtry? And if he ſhould be called to a whole Flock of ſuch ſouls, that deſire to be under Chriſts Government, although they know not diſtinctly what the nature and grounds of it are; ſhould he dare to caſt them off? Truly I ſhould not dare to do ſo, leſt I ſhould offend not onelyonly one of the little ones, but whole flocks thereof. What do I ſay then? is the Government of the Goſpell to be ſet up without preparation? ſhould all in the Congregation be promiſcuouſly admitted to all Ordinances? I ſay not ſo, but ſuch as have a Fundamentall knowledge of the Truth which is according to Godlineſſe; and being Unblameable in their lives, oblige themſelves profeſſedly to walk in all Gods wayes that ſhall be made known unto them: ſuch, I ſay, offering themſelves to be inſtructed and governed, may not be deſpiſed or caſt off, though very mean in judgement and other gifts, chiefly when they profeſſe a deſire to belong to the viſible Society of Saints: and you have nothing after tryall to except againſt them: For I ſuppoſe that God doth allot to every degree of Goſpell-Obedience, a proportionable degree of Goſpell-Government.
As for the compariſon of a Materiall building, I admit of it, and ſay, that if they be ſo qualified, as I have ſaid they ſhould be; good Government and pains to Teach and Catechiſe them, will without noiſe of the Axe or Hammer, wherof he ſpeaks, fit them in due time to their own places in the building. Now I am ſure all is in a confuſed heap, and it is not well poſſible, that matters can be worſe then they are, except all hopes and endeavours of advancing a Reformation be taken away: nor is it the ignorant multitude that cauſeth the noiſe of the Axe or Hammer, but it is the wilfull Diſputant that declines all Government, and would have nothing ſettled, that he may not be under any Relation, but ſuch as he himſelf ſhall ſet up, or caſt down as he pleaſeth.
The Fifth Section takes an Argument from Experience, as is ſuppoſed, thus;
That which in former times made the Reformation take little root, ſave in the outward and formall Obedience, is not now to be practiſed: but the ſpeedy Settlement of Government upon the Nation by the Power of the State, without the power of the Word, did this: Ergo, this is not to be Practiſed.
I Anſwer, that ſuch ſpeed is not made in the Settlement of Government, that it ſhould proceed from the power of the State, rather then from the Word; becauſe a courſe is taken that all matters ſhall be fully debated, and determined according to the Rule of the Word, before the power of the State doth meddle therewith; and then when the State doth order any thing to he Practiſed, it is ſettled not as a Law of Man, but according to the Doctrine, and by the Direction of the Word.
In former time, when this Nation came firſt out of Popery, the Word was not plentifully known, the Viſion was precious in thoſe dayes; and there was none that had power but the State to ſettle any Government; and if the State had not done it, it is not likely that we ſhould have had at this time any Church at all.
Thus you ſee that our preſent Caſe, and that of former times, are different; and that the Matter which he layes to the Charge of our firſt Reformers, is miſtaken.
Hitherto he hath played the Divine, drawing Arguments from matters of Religion, and how rationally he hath done this to my apprehenſion, I have declared: in his following Sections, he playes the Polititian, drawing Arguments from matters of State, and how wiſely he doth this to my apprehenſion, in like manner I will let you know. Nor will I here inſiſt to examine all after a Syllogiſticall way, to ſee how exactly he proves his Concluſion: For in matters of State it is the medium of Prudency (which here he pretends unto) which muſt give the Concuſion; therefore we will not expect Demonſtrations, but juſt and well grounded Allegations and Probabilities.
Firſt then, His 8th. and 9th. Sections (which I have made the third Generall Head of his Diſcourſe) ſpeaks of our New Clergie (as he is pleaſed to call them) and endeavours to make the State jealous of them.
In the 8th. Section, he ſayes, he has not yet any experiment of the New Clergy; he fears that they may incline too much to the Epiſcopall way: becauſe many are branches of the old Stock; Ergo, it is not ſafe to truſt Power into their hands too farre.
I Anſwer, that nothing is ſo difficult to Conquer, as State-Jealouſies, when Men make it a Principle of State Prudencie to be fearfull: what then is imagined whether true or falſe, that is to corrupt worldly Wiſdome, a ſufficient ground of Reſolution to take a courſe to prevent it by any thing that will do the turn, whether juſt or no. Now in true Chriſtian Prudencie this is not lawfull; for Charity doth not ſuſpect evill, 1 Cor. 13.5. and evill furniſhings are fruits of the fleſh, and follow upon ſuch Controverſies as theſe times produce, 1 Tim. 6.4. whereunto I would be ſorry that any body ſhould too deeply engage himſelf; therefore when he ſhall have conſidered the way wherein he ſets himſelf, better then hitherto he hath done; I hope he will ſee that it doth not become a Miniſter of the Goſpell, to fortifie this corrupt Principle of State in the hearts of States-men; chiefly againſt the Miniſtry, to hinder them in the exerciſe of their Miniſteriall Charge. If the Aime of hindering a Settlement of Church-Government, be not (as I conceive it is not) lawfull, then I muſt take leave to tell him; that it is not ſafe for him who is a Miniſter of the Goſpell, to ſtrengthen the hands of worldly Men, to croſs the wayes of true Government in Chriſtianity, by giving to them ſiniſter impreſſions of his Brethren. I find that the Chriſtian Wiſdome of the State, hath Prudently without any ſuch uncharitable grounds of evill ſurmiſing Policie, ſecured it ſelfe from the danger which he doth repreſent unto them. For the Covenant doth oblige all Miniſters to whom any power of Government is committed, to abjure that inclination to Epiſcopacy, which he ſuſpects in his Brethren: except then he will be ſo Uncharitable, as to ſuſpect them of Perjurie as well as of Ambition; he has no juſt cauſe to be ſo worldly wiſe, as to to perſwade States-men to violate the Tenor of their Covenant in one thing, to prevent the breach of it in another.
The ninth Section drawes deeper, and ſpeaks plainer: He tells us, that Experience ſhews the remainders of Prelacy in many; that ſome ſtrive for Pre-eminencie, as the two Brethren did; that the hotteſt Controverſie is for Power, that this diſcerns diſpoſitions. Hence he draws two Politic Concluſions. 1 That it is not good to part with the Stakes, till the quarrell be ended. 2. Nor to give one of the Parties cauſe to think it ſelfe injuried, if all Power ſhould be given to the other.
I Anſwer, if he will ſtay to ſettle all Government till there be no ambitious and aſpiring thoughts in ſome of the Miniſterie, he ſhall never ſettle any in our Age, nor perhaps in the following; and what although there are ſome who ſtrive as the two Brethren did for Pre eminency; is it therefore expedient, that the State ſhould not ſuffer any Miniſter to have the juſt power of Government belonging to his Charge? This Policie is too profound.
Indeed if he had alledged ſome Experiments of the Government which he diſſwades, to ſhew that where it hath been ſet up, ſince the beginning of the Reformation in Europe, it hath incroached upon the juſt Power of any State: or if he had ſhewed that the Fundam…ntall Conſtitutions and Properties thereof, are deſtructive to Civill Jurisdiction, as may be made good of other wayes of Church-Government; (I ſay) if he had been able to alledge and ſhew any of theſe things, then indeed he had ſaid ſomething for Caution worth the hearing: but if the contrary of this may be made apparant; namely that the deſired Government (if rightly ſettled) is ſo farre from aſpiring to that Power which belongeth to the State; that to keep all aſpiring Spirits in awe, by the Curb of an Authoritative equality, and to keep all Anarchicall Spirits in Order without prejudice to Chriſtian Liberty; there is nothing in this World ſo fit, as that very way of Government, which is ſued for: then ſurely he is very injuriouſly Politic in his perſwaſions, and cautions; but I ſuppoſe this may be made apparant very eaſily, therefore I excuſe him not from injurie.
But I beſeech you, what is the Power ſued for by the Miniſters here? Whether is it a State Power, or a Spiritual and Congregationall Power? if it be none other then that which all the Congregationall Church-Governours challenge to themſelves by Divine Right; why is it made a matter of greater jealouſie in theſe Miniſters th…n in Others? is not the ſame Power as dangerous in the one Partie as in the other? what aſſurance can He or the Congregationall Church-Governours give, that they ſhall not abuſe their Power ſo much as the others will do, ſeeing they will ſtand in all Church-Matters by themſelves alone, and not acknowledge any Eccleſiaſticall Judicature over them in doubtfull Caſes; and I doubt they will not make the Civill Magiſtrate an abſolute Judge in Church-Matters? what aſſurance then can they give, that they ſhall not abuſe their Authority? how ſhall the Subject be relieved from his grievances, if he be wronged by his Congregationall Brethren in his right to the Ordinances of Chriſt, or under a Religious pretence in ſome matter relating to his comfort, or his good name? He hath no competent Judge, but thoſe that have wronged him: Now the Presbyterian Government doth yet admit of Appeals to another Judicature: viz. a Claſſis, or a Synod. And whatſoever Mr. Saltmarſh may apprehend in the depth of his Politicall Jealouſie, I weigh it not; but I am very confident, that the New Reformers never thought of that which he layes to their Charge here; namely, that they deſire a ſhare of State-Power to be committed to their hands, and that they have a quarrell about this matter with the State, is a hainous Accuſation. But whiles he endeavours to caſt this aſpertion upon others, he doth manifeſtly accuſe himſelfe, and involves thoſe for whom he pleads to be really guilty, even of that whereof he injuſtly accuſes the Reforming Miniſters: elſe how can he pretend on their behalfe, that they have a right to this Power as wel as others? and that they wil think themſelves injured if not given? if others have no right to this Power, why ſhould they for whom he pleads pretend to it? and if they may think it an injurie to be deprived of it, then they clearly ſuppoſe, and he grants it that it is their due; and if ſo, why may not others as well as they pretend unto it? Here then in this Caſe, you may perceive that he mak…s himſelf and thoſe that he pleads for, pretenders to that which he allows not in others; and by his own confeſſion herein, they and he have more of the Prelatical Ambition then can be ſhewed in any Miniſter that he knows. He ſayes wel, that it is to be feared there is too much of Man in theſe Conteſtations; for this Spirit which is now in him, doth covet to envie; For he would have Power denyed to the Party he affects not, not ſo much becauſe it is not due to them; but becauſe he would not have them to have it, when it is not likely that he himſelf can obtain it; therefore he pleads, that no Power at all may be permitted to any, to ſettle any Church-Government at all. For which I ſuppoſe, none of the Churches of God, whether of the one or other way, have cauſe to give him thanks: The Papiſts who watch for our Diſſolution, and Libertines whoſe part he Acts, will thank him.
I have done with his firſt point of Policy, which is to ſtirre up jealouſies againſt the New Clergie. The Second Point is Intereſt, which is two-fold to Power and in Perſons: the Intereſt to Power, hath two Conſiderations in his Diſcourſe; the one is in 7th. the other in the 10th Section.
His ſeventh Section tells the State, that there is danger in erring, if it ſuddenly involve it ſelf into the deſignes of Eccleſiaſticall Power; he ſayes, there is no danger in the not ſudden incorporating the two Powers; becauſe Moſes is not alive to bring the Pattern from the Mount, and a new Star may ariſe which yet appears not.
I Anſwer; his Policy leads him here to be a Sceptick in Religion: For he Reaſons thus; ſomething may hereafter be diſcovered, which ſhall be better then what is now offered: therefore what we now allow, is not to be made uſe of. May not I ſay as well ſome New Truth may be diſcovered; Ergo, I will not profeſſe what I now know? ſome Star may ariſe, is leſſe then what the Jews Tradition ſayes Elias will come. His ground is not ſo ſure as theirs, he tells us onelyonly doubtfully that he may come; and then would make this a warrantable ground to ſuſpend the Settlement of an allowed Government. And is there any Reaſon in this? But what if no new Star ariſe? what if theſe Confuſions grow greater, and become habituall? will not then this Policy prove folly? the ſilly Proverb might inſtruct him, that it is better to have half a Cake, then no Bread. But then he ſayes, there is no great danger in the not ſudden incorporating of two Powers: he takes it as granted, that the two Powers ſhould be incorporated, but that is but his fancie, and neither true Divinity nor good State Prudency: the thing he aims at, is a Delay; but I may tell him, that wiſer States-Men then either He or I, wil ſay, Nocuit differre paratis, thoſe that are ready looſe by delayes: and ſeeing in all this, he ſpeaks a language which I never heard before in any Reformed Miniſters mouth, ſpeaking of the Reformed Miniſtry; therefore I muſt again obſerve that his meaning is to grant, that both Powers may be in one hand; and that the Eccleſiaſticall may have Deſignes, and be abuſed to break the Civill Power. I confeſſe, that if the Powers be as he calls them incorporated, they may be abuſed, whether they be in the hand of the Civill or Eccleſiaſticall Miniſter: but if they be kept diſtinct in Adminiſtration, as they are in nature, and co-ordinate in Authority as they are in vertue, and mutually ſubordinate to each other in Fundamentall Conſtitutions, as they are in their Ends; then all this fear will vaniſh: For this being granted, and Matters thus ſettled, the Eccle…aſticall can have no deſign upon the Civill; but as long as he grants the incorporating of both into one and the ſame hand, he will never avoid this. True it is, the Papall and Prelaticall State doth incorporate both; but if he can ſhew wherein the Reforme… do it, he ſhould have done well to have laid it open, and ſuggeſted a better Remedy then the Diſſolution of all Government, which is ſo farre from a Remedy, that it is worſt of all Diſeaſes; and truly it is clear in this his Diſcourſe, and perhaps in his whole way that he practiſes for his own part, the mixture of Politicall and Eccleſiaſtiall deſigns, to make his Pen ſerve Mens turns, which how he will anſwer to God one day, I would wiſh him to conſider ſadly if I knew him.
The tenth Section, ſhews that there ought to be ſome Proportion in the two Powers, and ſome Compliance; ſo that the eſtabliſhing of the one, doth draw with it ſome motions in the other. He tells us, that it is hazardous to diſ-intereſt any in the Civill part, he doth alledge France for an example, &c.
All this is rather againſt his main Concluſion, then for it▪ For if there ſhould be a Proportion and Compliance in both Powers; then he muſt allow the Church-Government at leaſt ſo much Settlement, as he doth the Civill, except he will poſtpoſe the Kingdome of Heaven to the State of the World; and if he thinks it fit, that the Eccleſiaſticall State ſhould be Unſettled, it may upon his grounds be rationally inferred, that in ſome proportion he thinks it fit, that the Civill alſo ſhould be wholly Unſettled; and how juſtly this may be intended by any that have ſworn to God to endeavour the Union and Settlement of the Kingdoms in Peace, I will not now debate. But all this tends in his Aime, to make way for the following and laſt Section; wherein he recommends the Intereſt of the diſſenting Brethren to the State, and gives advice to ſuſpend the ſettlement of Government ſo, as not to determine too ſuddenly into Hereticks and Schiſmaticks, in hope that their affections and judgements may be drawne to Unity; whereof in the Cloſe he would give us ſome Conjecture of poſſibility.
This I do not at all diſlike, but rather approve, that if any thing ſhould move and perſwade to any delay of Settlement in Government, it ſhould be the Hope of Union betwixt the Reformers and their diſſenting Brethren; and becauſe this is now under tryall, how farre the Unity of diſſenting Parties in the Aſſembly may be gained; therefore I think it very Rationall and Anſwerable to the Counſells of Peace, that nothing be ſettled in that matter wherein the difference is, till a full triall be made of the Means of Compoſing the ſame: yet to delay the Settlement of other Matters wherein there is no difference at all, is no point of Wiſdome, except it be thought wiſdome to gratifie the deſignes of Papiſts, and hopes of Libertines: Nor is it Juſtice to refuſe the Settlement of a Government allowed, and Voted by the State to thoſe that deſire to be under it, becauſe there are ſome of a different way that decline it: Shall all be kept in ſuſpence and in diſorder, becauſe either there is no agreement in ſome few things, or becauſe ſome few decline all manner of Government? the Apoſtles counſell is, That ſo farre as we are come, we ſhould be like minded,Phil. 3.16. and walk by the ſame Rule. The Intereſt againſt a Common Enemie, is not a tye ſtrong enough to Unite ſome Spirits in matters concerning God: chiefly when ſuch ſtinging Pamphlets blow the Coals of Diſſention, and, without controle, aſperſe injuriouſly their Brethren with falſe Accuſations, to entangle the ſimple conſciences with ſcruples to foment jealouſies, to flatter Worldlings into deceitfull Policies, and to ſtrengthen the Unruly affections of the unruly Multitude, againſt the reſpect which is to be had unto Order and Government, even with a colourable pretence of Religion. And although I will judge Charitably of the Mans intentions in this Matter; yet truly his writing cannot be excuſed from guilt in this kind: I hear he is not a very ſtayed man, and I conceive he is led in his heat, faſter then he is able to diſcern his way, or to judge the Spirit by which he is led, which in this buſineſſe is very neceſſary to be done with great adviſedneſſe; and thoſe that in humility mind not themſelves in meddling with theſe Matters, are farre from that temper which will advance Truth and Peace; whereunto I beſeech the Lord to direct us in all meekneſſe. For from theſe we are all ſtrangers by nature, therefore we grope like blind Men for the wall, we ſtumble at noon-day as in the night, and while we look for Judgement there is none, and for ſalvation it is farre from us. The Lord be mercifull to Us, and teach us to ſtrengthen the things which Remain, which are ready to die, for our Works are not found perfect with our God. The Lord deliver us from the Line of Confuſion, which ſeemeth to be ſtretched out upon us, and heal our Breaches for Chriſt his ſake. Amen.